DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X
2 NAVY ANNE
S
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
TRG
Docket No:
9 May 2001
7782-00
Dear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
Your allegations of error and
application on 8 May 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
Board.
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 31
October 1978 at age 19 and reported for three years of active
duty on that same day.
completed initial training and reported to your first duty
station on 2 March 1979. On 30 April 1979 you were advanced to FA
(E-2).
release from active duty on 30 October 1981 with your service
characterized as honorable.
honorable discharge at the end of your military obligation.
You then served in a satisfactory manner until your
The record shows that you satisfactorily
Subsequently, you were issued an
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individuals who do not meet professional growth criteria by
advancing to pay grade E-3 during an extended period of active
As indicated, you were advanced to E-2 on 30 April 1979
duty.
and were never advanced to E-3.
differently than others in your situation, the Board could not
find an
reenlistment code.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
in the assignment of the
e&or or injustice
Since you have been treated no
RE-4
The names and
upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken.
You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of-probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05980-00
Dear This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United Board for Correction of Navy A three-member panel for the Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00302-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. treated no differently than others separated in similar circumstances, the Board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05850-01
A You were marked 3.0 ("meets The reporting senior noted The evaluation for the period ending 15 July 2000 showed you were now promotable and meeting standards in all categories. discharged from your second enlistment, you had not advanced Therefore, you met the criteria for reenlistment when For the first reenlistment, an However, at the time you were 2 Since you The Board found beyond E-3 and were not recommended for advancement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07934-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 28 November 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the Your allegations of error and injustice were considered your application on proceedi ngs of this Board. Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who fail to meet the professional growth criteria for reenlistment or who are not recommended for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04367-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Although the facts and circumstances surrounding the withdrawal of command's recommendation for advancement and retention are not shown in available records, the Board concluded that an adverse evaluation for the two month period prior to your release from active duty provided sufficient...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08558-00
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2001. Your performance evaluation for the period from 1 December 1987 to 13 April 1988 reflects a nonrecommendation for continued service or reenlistment because you were not a positive contributor to the Navy. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code given your substandard performance and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08743-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. You believe there was disparate treatment because the chief petty officer only received a punitive letter of reprimand and was retained in the Navy,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00959-01
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 June 2001. On 7 June 1994, while still serving as an SR, you were honorably released from active duty and transferred to the Naval Reserve with an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09305-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 10 December 2001, you enlisted in the Navy at age 23. To satisfy professional growth criteria for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02202-00
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board concluded that in the absence of the last performance evaluation, withholding your advancement and the nonjudicial punishment for a period of unauthorized absence were sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...